Re: Intensionality (was: The Riemann Zeta Pythagorean TOE)

Another categorization of this dichotomy could be the Plato universals corresponding to Intensional definitions and the possible, vs. the Aristotle particulars corresponding to the Extensional definitions and the actual. The Intensional can also be associated with mathematical descriptions an

Re: Intensionality (was: The Riemann Zeta Pythagorean TOE)

Hi, Le Mercredi 5 Avril 2006 22:07, John M a écrit : > Stephen: > > right on! (onwards, of course). > I did not mention the arts. Express "art" by numbers > and you killed the art. It is not a question to describe art by numbers... I'd say it is totally unrelated, in a materialistic view don't

Re: Intensionality (was: The Riemann Zeta Pythagorean TOE)

Stephen: right on! (onwards, of course). I did not mention the arts. Express "art" by numbers and you killed the art. Maybe I misunderstand the idea, but a representation by (any kind and length of) numbers is (in my mind at least) rational. Art is not. Emotions (some of them) are not necessari

Re: Numbers

Le 04-avr.-06, à 19:31, Brent Meeker a écrit : > > Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> Le 01-avr.-06, à 19:18, 1Z a écrit : > ... >> >> If you believe in absolute QM (or just assume absolute QM I eman QM >> without wave collapse) then, obviously, observers are subject to the >> SWE, and are multiplied or